Misplaced Pages

User talk:NJA: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:39, 21 January 2010 editNJA (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators30,514 edits Can you unofficially mediate?: add ideas← Previous edit Revision as of 02:20, 22 January 2010 edit undo94.193.135.142 (talk) Can you unofficially mediate?Next edit →
Line 63: Line 63:
:Please note that despite the IP editor's above assertions that I ''sparked an edit war'', they have been blocked for breaking the 3RR , altho' they have return and repeatedly reverting again, and there is currently an open Wikiquette alert about numerous breaches of ] here , which probably should also include the above assumptions of bad faith. The article talk page was cleared for ], however the clearance was reverted by the IP editor. The editor doesn't seem to understand that reliable sources state that the jamming of ] was confirmed by the satellite operator (Eutelsat) to come from Iran, and appears to think it is the BBC's opinion instead. I have discussed my edits in edit summaries and the article talk page. However the IP editor has been attacking myself and another editor (] section "Cunando") ''I will report you, I have reported many of your kind successfully before and have no problem following the same routes again''. ]. ] (]) 13:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC) :Please note that despite the IP editor's above assertions that I ''sparked an edit war'', they have been blocked for breaking the 3RR , altho' they have return and repeatedly reverting again, and there is currently an open Wikiquette alert about numerous breaches of ] here , which probably should also include the above assumptions of bad faith. The article talk page was cleared for ], however the clearance was reverted by the IP editor. The editor doesn't seem to understand that reliable sources state that the jamming of ] was confirmed by the satellite operator (Eutelsat) to come from Iran, and appears to think it is the BBC's opinion instead. I have discussed my edits in edit summaries and the article talk page. However the IP editor has been attacking myself and another editor (] section "Cunando") ''I will report you, I have reported many of your kind successfully before and have no problem following the same routes again''. ]. ] (]) 13:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
*I'm unable to mediate at this time. Perhaps a request should be filed at ]? Though I think at this stage since it's between the two of you, consider trying ] first. Also consider letting the people at the BBC Wikiproject know (]), as they may have comments on it. Thanks, ] <small> ]]'''</small> 16:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC) *I'm unable to mediate at this time. Perhaps a request should be filed at ]? Though I think at this stage since it's between the two of you, consider trying ] first. Also consider letting the people at the BBC Wikiproject know (]), as they may have comments on it. Thanks, ] <small> ]]'''</small> 16:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Rapido, the history of the page speaks for it self, you do not need to lie in the face of being exposed for starting an edit war and having an arrogant attitude despite my many invitations for you to provide a reason for reverts or engage in an discussion. Only now, have I seen any significant talk from you, and this is when you're arrogance is exposed. And yes, many people clear discussion pages without valid reason and they should get reported, and I will report anyone who thinks they can come on Misplaced Pages to bring an POV. You obviously have a POV as your editing and revert clearly favours the BBC. We shall take this to all corners of Misplaced Pages, mediation, official reports, third opinion, for I shall prove that editors like you should not stop editors like me bringin accuracy, validity and NPOV to the world by making wikipedia better. And also remember, Attacking someone or their editing is two different things, hope that helped you. For anyone who wants to see the real story, a quick look at the discussion page and the history page (which Rapido can't revert thank God) will show justice. --] (]) 02:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


== MMA Tycoon == == MMA Tycoon ==

Revision as of 02:20, 22 January 2010

Welcome to NJA's talk page! Please click here to leave me a new message. Archives

0102030405
06070809101112

The admins' T-shirt. Acalamari 20:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)



Edit war in Dimitrije Tucović page.

I want to say hello, and thank you for having blocked the Dimitrije Tucović page. I´m not quite sure if you had the desire to have the resons (at least from me) explained here on your talk page (I don´t want to bore you with this). But, I do need help and advice because this situation, the other user in question, have made me have more edit wars in the last week than all reverts ar any other "incidents" in my past year and a half. I must tell you that I edit WP mostly as a hobby and for all this period I have been a creator and editor of exclusivelly Football (soccer) related articles. I was never a player, but as I like the sport and the historical statistics, that has been pretty much my work around here. But, as a person born in Belgrade (Serbia), althou I only lived there 3 years of my life (I´m 30), as I like history and geography, geopolitics too, I can´t resist from time to time to have a look at WP articles related with those areas. With all the recent (and no so recent, Yugoslav war,WWII, etc.) events there, I´m very much used to see many of those articles edited in a non-Serbian POV. Until here, I supose I´m not telling you nothing new, and I never edited, even less engadged in any edit wars, in any of those articles. The problem appeared when I saw this user User:Mladifilozof making massive edits in big number of Serbia-related historical and current articles. His edits promply called my attention, since it was pretty clear that the editor was a heavy anti-Serbian nationalist. His edits were sow NPOV that was almost absurd. The editor in question likes to present himself as a "moderate Serb" and in one of the talk pages of an another editor that had an edit war with him, he said:

"Moramo plakati i pisati o zločinima koje je naša država počinili prema Drugima, ne bi li smo se na taj način iskupili.--Mladifilozof (talk) 12:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Tadija" here

in translation: "We must cry and write about the atrocities that our nation (he means Serbia) commited against others, so that way we could be redemed."

Until here, there is also nothing strange (Some Serbs and its polititians did some horrendus stuff in recent past), but that looks more like an disguise, because his edits go way beyond that. His edits all go around the same, that is to show how Serbia occupied in the past (all history, middle ages and Renesance included) other peoples territories, and made mass murders, ethnic cleansing... and very much around the Kosovo Independence issue. He uses sources, but he changes the text, or the meaning, as the necessities of his purposes (some editors cought him doing this). He was warned by many users, and throu said, he doesn´t receve support from any other editor. But, if left, he would harm greatly a great number of those articles, that were mainly written in a good way (neutral). After being warned many times to at least try to edit in NPOV, nothing never changed.

I´m not certainly a Serbian nationalist (they destroyed a nation!) but, as much as I dislike the Serbian nationalists, I also dislike all other "blind" nationaliosts, racists or any other discriminatory moviments. There should be a limit imposed on how far the editors of such tendencies should be allowed to go. Fighting Serbian nationalism with even more nationalism, but reverted, just isn´t the best solution.

In the article in question, he wants to use a citation in wich Tucovic speaks about the suffering of the Albanian people, but that is just one of the sentencies in thousands of pages of his work, and there are much more important ones that should be used first. I´m not in deniyal of Albanian suffering, right the oposite, but there are already articles in with the issue is well described, and the citate used (despite being decontextualised, but anyway). It´s like if I writte an article about David Beckham, and among the most important information, I chouse to writte about his declarations in one trip he made to Albania where he said that he was robbed and how dirty and primitive the country was... That would just be ridiculous and decontextualised, right? Please, is there a way to fight extremist (politics) editors? FkpCascais (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I think the best advice I can offer is to get assistance from other interested editors so that together you all can work out what's best. The guidance document on dispute resolution offers a structure for dealing with issues you may encounter with other editors. Options for you may be to get a third opinion, or possibly listing the issue for attention at a relevant Wikiproject (perhaps these), or possibly seek assistance at the conflicts noticeboard. I'd definitely recommend a read over WP:DR and the other links I provided. I wish both of you the best of luck. Regards, NJA (t/c) 07:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Many, many thanx. That were exactly the kind of alternatives I needed to have. I´ll definitelly have to spend more time learning the different WP policies here. Many thanx again, and I´m really sorry to bother you with this. FkpCascais (talk) 07:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Hadith Deletion

Hi NJA. Just wanted to say Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Hadith in praise of Umar also included the sister article Hadith of Umar and the Qur'an which you have not deleted. Polargeo (talk) 11:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 Done NJA (t/c) 12:04, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Lion0256

Re your warning for userpage vandalism, it's actually pretty funny—that account is a sockpuppet (the second of two so far) that User:Majestic27 created to award himself barnstars after I called him out for displaying a fraudulent one with a real user's signature, and then urged against vainly awarding them to himself in a conversation at my talkpage. Serves him right to get a warning.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 12:01, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh that's just sad. NJA (t/c) 12:04, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Greg Caton

Can you provide any guidance on the close relationship tag on the Greg Caton page? Off2riorob has conducted a pretty good scrub. Jettparmer (talk) 16:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

It was in response to this. Though if it's been scrubbed then by all means take it down. NJA (t/c) 16:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Can you unofficially mediate?

Rapido has so far refused to engage in an healthy discussion, and has sparked an edit war, remaining quiet, stubborn and refusing to engage in my numerous requests for him to discuss before reverting. I'm not sure if he has a strategy to get me blocked or is just arrogant, I started an discussion on the discussion page in "BBC Persian Television" discussion page, and during reverts and edits provided my reasons. A number of times people have cleared the discussion page for unknown reasons, however, i've tried to revert it more or less to how it was when I came. Please be professional and try to look at it through neutrality, without political interests you may have and help for an outcome which will provide a more accurate account, which is what I will I strive for, accuracy. Hope you can help. My next step is official mediation, and other avenues, but I thought I'll see if you can help first.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=BBC_Persian_Television&action=history < Article history http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:BBC_Persian_Television#Satelite_Jamming_dispute < Discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/BBC_Persian_Television < Article itself

Thanks ˄˅

--94.193.135.142 (talk) 12:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Please note that despite the IP editor's above assertions that I sparked an edit war, they have been blocked for breaking the 3RR , altho' they have return and repeatedly reverting again, and there is currently an open Wikiquette alert about numerous breaches of WP:AOBF here , which probably should also include the above assumptions of bad faith. The article talk page was cleared for WP:SOAP, however the clearance was reverted by the IP editor. The editor doesn't seem to understand that reliable sources state that the jamming of BBC Persian Television was confirmed by the satellite operator (Eutelsat) to come from Iran, and appears to think it is the BBC's opinion instead. I have discussed my edits in edit summaries and the article talk page. However the IP editor has been attacking myself and another editor (] section "Cunando") I will report you, I have reported many of your kind successfully before and have no problem following the same routes again. WP:BATTLE. Rapido (talk) 13:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm unable to mediate at this time. Perhaps a request should be filed at WP:MEDCAB? Though I think at this stage since it's between the two of you, consider trying a third opinion first. Also consider letting the people at the BBC Wikiproject know (here), as they may have comments on it. Thanks, NJA (t/c) 16:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Rapido, the history of the page speaks for it self, you do not need to lie in the face of being exposed for starting an edit war and having an arrogant attitude despite my many invitations for you to provide a reason for reverts or engage in an discussion. Only now, have I seen any significant talk from you, and this is when you're arrogance is exposed. And yes, many people clear discussion pages without valid reason and they should get reported, and I will report anyone who thinks they can come on Misplaced Pages to bring an POV. You obviously have a POV as your editing and revert clearly favours the BBC. We shall take this to all corners of Misplaced Pages, mediation, official reports, third opinion, for I shall prove that editors like you should not stop editors like me bringin accuracy, validity and NPOV to the world by making wikipedia better. And also remember, Attacking someone or their editing is two different things, hope that helped you. For anyone who wants to see the real story, a quick look at the discussion page and the history page (which Rapido can't revert thank God) will show justice. --94.193.135.142 (talk) 02:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

MMA Tycoon

what is PROD or AFD? thanx Sthowp (talk) 15:03, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't matter for your purposes really. They are just others methods for other editors to request deletion of the article. Happy editing, NJA (t/c) 16:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)